1. With the RC turned off, the HW50 appears very similar in PQ to the HW30.

2. Pixel structure clarity is about the same as it was with the HW30.

3. IMO, the vast majority of the PQ differences between the 30 and 50 is the RC sharpening process. It's a bit overcooked out of the box, but has a number of options to adjust the settings.

4. RC and Darbee processing are quite different when inspected close up. There are some examples in the photos below.

5. (off topic but relevant, color looks very good out of the box!)

The difference is striking at first with RC=ON, it's much more drastic than the Darbee @ 50%. It looks good at first glance, but it can do a number on the noise in the background. Most eyes are going to be drawn to the noticeable increase in perceived sharpness, but the sharpening is taking effect on the entire image, so noise will stand out with the default settings.

Next I want to experiment with various settings of the RC. Like the Darbee, when used in moderation, can add to the overall PQ. I can see plenty of potential with the RC sharpening process and will post more when I find a good balance of the RC + Darbee on the 142" @ 1.25 sw.

The camera is quite close to the screen for the first set up closeups:

edit: back to the RC for a few minutes. I turned the RESOLUTION setting all the way to minimum. MUCH better now.. it adds just enough sharpness to appreciate the difference but not overdoing it in the background or making it look overly sharp.

Overall, out of the box PQ looks very good (provided the RC resolution is turned down a bit). Based on first impressions, I would prefer the HW50 with the RC over the HW30 with the Darbee.

RC=OFF, Darbee = OFF

RC=ON, Resolution = Minimum, Darbee = OFF. This looks very good without being overdone. There's an increase in perceived sharpness & detail in the face, hair, etc. The noise is reasonably controlled in the background with this setting

1. The HW30 and HW50 appear very similar when RC is turned off. The pixel structure is similar to last year. It's going to vary based on different samples, but very close nonetheless. Neither have the defined pixel structure as seen on the 5010, W7000 or current JVC's.

2. If folks were here with me looking at these side by side, I think most would agree on a 142" screen, that the Sony's would be the seen as optically softer (no software enhancements) than the other models from JVC, Epson and BQ. The RC helps reverse that perception. When used in moderation, it's a nice enhancement for this projector. With it set to the minimum in 2D, the positives out-weigh the negative since most folks eyes are going to be drawn to the perceived increase in sharpness.

However, we can't ignore though that it applies the effect across the entire image, so certain movies with strong film grain might be affected. I have to watch 'Road Warrior' later on BD which has strong grain, I'm curious to see how the RC performs here.

Optical Sharpness Sony vs JVC

1. The current RS45/RS55 (no-eshift) are optically sharper than the HW30 and HW50 (without the RC) if we are inspecting each system at the pixel level. Even the entry JVC has a very good lens which resolves a well defined pixel grid from edge to edge. My particular RS55 is exceptional in this regard, A+ lens copy.

HW30 vs. HW50 - 3D comparison

1. The HW50 is brighter. I should be able to get some 3D lumen measurements tonight while the lamp is still new.

2. Motion flow in 3D works as good as it did before in the HW30. Some will remember I was quite vocal in a positive way about the FI in 3D and the quality processing here continues to look good.

3. Crosstalk- Very similar, and possibly a hair better than the HW30. I have to get some 'through the glasses' screenshots later, I've been too busy playing around with 2D content. The majority of folks are going to be very happy with the overall 3D performance. The key ingredient is the RC in 3D. It's does a great job of sharpening up animations in 3D and combined with the FI, it's looks good. I wish the flicker was a bit more subdued (I can always detect it compared to the 3D DLP's) but it's not likely to bother unless you are conscious of flicker or have been tainted by 3D DLP's abilities to produce a rock solid image.

HW50 Contrast performance

1. Definitely an improvement over the HW30. Not night and day, but the 142" 2.8HP is very unforgiving for the black floor. 1st ten minutes of Underworld Evolution are a benchmark, there isn't a whole lot the iris can do here. I would say it's similar to the 5010 now, but will need to stack the HW50 and upcoming 5020 to be fair here on the comment.

2. Bright and mixed contrast scenes look great overall, no concerns here. The DI works well and was generally undetectable.

3. HW50 vs.the RS55 with Dark sci-fi / Native contrast - None of the current models are quite the same as the RS55 @ -13 if were looking for that top level of black floor performance. We can't take everything away from JVC and the native contrast of this projector is still phenomenal and is in a class of it's own. Having said that, the majority of new owners should be quite happy with the performance of the HW50.

RC vs. E-shift

1. The reality creative is a clever sharpening technique. I think they went too high with the default settings, but it's going to elicit big 'WOW's when it's first seen. It's quite dramatic. When turned down, it's a nice sharpening trick to fool the eye that the image is sharper than it really is. All the sharpening techniques have some artifacts, but to what degree? The RC can make rough-shot of any noise when used with the default settings, it has to be used in moderation to balance it's effect vs. bringing unwanted artifacts into the image

2. The RC and e-shift are very different, but attempting to achieve the same things. Make 1080P content look better than it really is on a large screen. The 142" is unforgiving. Sitting close makes an even tougher audience when comparing these processes.

If we are praising the RC based on the initial impressions, we have to give equal accolades to JVC's E-shift technique. My first impression is that the e-shift does it with more finesse than the RC. It's more subtle and natural due to the increase in pixel density. Both have their appeal which we'll look at more closely soon. The RC is a good addition to the all-ready solid HW30 platform. It was something that was quite necessary to stay competitive.

We will continue to explore the RC vs. E-shift 1 vs. E-shift 2.

Sony HW50 Overall - This is a nice projector for the price point. I liked my HW30 and this HW50 is a good upgrade. Better brightness, Sharpness (due to the RC) and very good 3D. I do wish it had the power lens and native optical sharpness of the VW95 lens, but that might not be possible at this price point. We do need to investigate the buzzing in 3D mode as I can definitely hear it during the movie.

Of course there are still a number of upcoming models which can't be ignored, so we'll look at those as well when they are released.

Since this is the AV(Science) forum - we're going to continue to pick and prod at the new models and continue to compare because that is what people who are obsessed with front projectors do.

This is a running review discussion with no specific conclusions at the end of page 4 like the typical published reviews. I encourage anyone with actual firsthand experience of the old and new models to please join in on the conversation. This is what made the last shootout such a success, great input from the AVS enthusiasts.

Factory glasses, left eye, brightness set to 3. 3D crosstalk performance is near identical to the HW30. I haven't had a chance to re-tune the MV3D's yet, I'll get a chance to do that soon and will report back.

Observations:

we can see the faint outline along the side of the tree in Grand Canyon. it's subtle and stands out a bit more with the RC turned on, but overall very good 3D performance in this tough scene. Only the DLP's can reproduce this scene with zero errors.

The RC was set to 50 Resolution in 3D mode and I thought it was a little overcooked, so I lowered it to ~40. It looks good, but started to notice some artifacts when watching Journey to the Mysterious Island 2. Look at 'The Rock''s shirt. The increase in noise is replicated in 3D, so there is a bit of strange pattern that my eyes are following since it's now in 'stereo'.

The W7000 with the Darbee @ 30% is very sharp and clean. I have to do an A/B with the HW50 and W7000 on this specific scene (and the night scene as well) to get a better understanding of the effect RC has on the background noise. I also have to experiment with tweaking the noise filter. I wanted to give an idea of what it looks like 'out of the box'.

This is exciting. You are going to have the best weekend ever playing with all these toys.
Christmas came early for you I guess.

I am really looking forward to your review. I have been waiting for this for a while now since I intend on upgrading my PJ this year, in a month or two.
At the moment the Epson 5020 is on top of my list but I am open to change.
I want to wait for the first reviews and bugs to surface before buying one.

I have some interest in the new Sony -- Will you please check out the "buzz" in 3D mode and the "ghosting". I am not interested in spending a lot more money and importing the Monstervision glasses to get better 3D. According to Kraine the Sony has more "pop" in 3D than the other 3D projectors he's reviewed -- please comment. Can you please check out the 2D to 3D conversion and determine if any of these projectors have a conversion that is worth using.

This is exciting. You are going to have the best weekend ever playing with all these toys.
Christmas came early for you I guess.

Well I'm guessing it will be 25% fun and 75% hard work! A lot of time and effort will be going into getting photos, analysis and then posting the findings. There will be people from all over the world watching the progress so a very big thanks in advance from me Zombie, your work will be very much appreciated

Well I'm guessing it will be 25% fun and 75% hard work! A lot of time and effort will be going into getting photos, analysis and then posting the findings. There will be people from all over the world watching the progress so a very big thanks in advance from me Zombie, your work will be very much appreciated

+1 from me. All these early reviews are great to read to help the buying process, much appreciated.

"What is striking about the 3020e's image is its pop, punch, and color. Sure, a projector rated at 40,000:1 contrast with over 2,000 lumens behind it is never going to command home-theater-levels of contrast, nor is black level ever going to be as deep as Epson's more up-market offering, the Home Cinema 5020. But having a big, bright, vibrant picture can make you forget all of those things. The image produced by the 3020e has plenty of depth, and color is almost perfect right out of the box, so it is a great projector if you just want something to set up and use without a lot of fuss."

The Epson 3020 got an extremely positively review from PC. Here's hoping the 5020 does as well. Should make for a very competitive shootout.http://www.projectorcentral.com/epson_3020e_home_video_projector_review.htm
"What is striking about the 3020e's image is its pop, punch, and color. Sure, a projector rated at 40,000:1 contrast with over 2,000 lumens behind it is never going to command home-theater-levels of contrast, nor is black level ever going to be as deep as Epson's more up-market offering, the Home Cinema 5020. But having a big, bright, vibrant picture can make you forget all of those things. The image produced by the 3020e has plenty of depth, and color is almost perfect right out of the box, so it is a great projector if you just want something to set up and use without a lot of fuss."

Yeah, the 3020 sounds like it has some great improvements and is awesome for the price. But I'm hoping the Epson 5010 ends up having greater lag improvement over last year's model, since the input lag on the 3020 only improved slightly. Anyone know what the input lag difference was between the 5010 and 3010 models, if any at all?

The Epson 3020 got an extremely positively review from PC. Here's hoping the 5020 does as well. Should make for a very competitive shootout.http://www.projectorcentral.com/epson_3020e_home_video_projector_review.htm
"What is striking about the 3020e's image is its pop, punch, and color. Sure, a projector rated at 40,000:1 contrast with over 2,000 lumens behind it is never going to command home-theater-levels of contrast, nor is black level ever going to be as deep as Epson's more up-market offering, the Home Cinema 5020. But having a big, bright, vibrant picture can make you forget all of those things. The image produced by the 3020e has plenty of depth, and color is almost perfect right out of the box, so it is a great projector if you just want something to set up and use without a lot of fuss."

Quote:
3D image quality. Last year, we weren't so keen on the Home Cinema 3010's 3D image. Granted, it was Epson's first 3D projector, but it also produced a lot of crosstalk and flickering instability. 3D has been vastly improved on the 3020e. First of all, Epson has switched to radio-frequency 3D glasses, which we prefer over the infrared variety for reasons discussed below. Second, the projector has very little crosstalk at its default settings, and can be made to have even less crosstalk by lowering glasses brightness to "low." Finally, the flickering instability is all but absent. The 3D flicker is something that bothers me quite a bit, but I did not find it objectionable on the 3020e.
The projectors and reviewers have improved over last year. Much less crosstalk? PC talking flicker??
This is great news.
This thread appears to be heavily weighted toward JVC. Four models? What about Mitsubishi? The Panasonic has improved too.
In the meantime e-Shift will no doubt be pumped here, even though Mark says it will be a footnote in projector history...

Some initial impressions on the RC vs. Darbee on Post #2. It's getting late, but have to check out some 3D first.

edit: back to the RC for a few minutes. I turned the RESOLUTION setting all the way to minimum. MUCH better now.. it adds just enough sharpness to appreciate the difference but not overdoing it in the background or making it look overly sharp.

Overall, out of the box PQ looks very good (provided the RC resolution is turned down a bit). Based on first impressions, I would prefer the HW50 with the RC over the HW30 with the Darbee.

RC=OFF, Darbee = OFF

RC=ON, Resolution = Minimum, Darbee = OFF. This looks very good without being overdone. There's an increase in perceived sharpness & detail in the face, hair, etc. The noise is reasonably controlled in the background with this setting

Funny, he was up all night from his job before as well, someone who has his number should just call him and wake him up again so we can get more info...
(Sorry Z, but all the other reviewers have gone the way of the dark side on their reviews). My favorite reviewer quote was "the JVC blacks are so dark you can't even tell the projector is on" (haha yah, that was a good strong prescription some reviewer I won't mention was taking).

...My favorite reviewer quote was "the JVC blacks are so dark you can't even tell the projector is on" (haha yah, that was a good strong prescription some reviewer I won't mention was taking).

When you read comments like that it's difficult to take any comments on black levels seriously and it also implies that their expectations for black levels are low as well. No wonder the Panasonic looks so great to them.